Re: [O] Bug: Capturing to datetree with inactive timestamp messes up level of heading

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Gregor Zattler <address@hidden> writes:

> customizing org to add timestamps in datetrees via …
> (org-datetree-add-timestamp (quote inactive) nil nil "Add an
> inactive time stamp when create a datetree entry.")… and
> activating a minimal capture template which captures to a
> datetree results in:
>
> a)
>
> * 2015                                  
> ** 2015-08 August                       
> *** 2015-08-19 Mittwoch                 
> [2015-08-19 Mi]                         
> ** actual entry heading of captured item
>
> The heading of the newly captured item is at level 2 instead at
> level 4.  I consider this to be a bug.  A second capture item to
> the same day is correctly created at level 4 (and bevor the first
> captured item which does not belong to the same (or any) day in
> the datetree).

Fixed. Thank you.

> 2)
>
> The timestamp is added to the heading of the day under which the
> captured item is stored iff the day entry is created for this
> capture.
>
> I think the timestamp should go with the actual captured entry.
> This allows for a timestamp for each captured entry under the
> same date heading.  They may be made at different days.

This is a different feature. Since it belongs to the captured entry, the
timestamp should be defined in your capture template (e.g. "%t"
placeholder) instead.

> 3)
>
> The timestamp adds only a date but I think it’s much more
> interesting to capture with date+time.

This is not the purpose of `org-datetree-add-timestamp' variable. 

Its main uses are to link datetrees with agenda and to build time-based
sparse trees from a datetree.

> Think of several journal entries all done at the same day but at
> different times of a day.

See above. You can use "%T".


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou